In this “second generation” state system, both districts ...



State Accountability Ratings

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) rates school districts and individual campuses as Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable or Academically Unacceptable at the end of each school year. The ratings are based primarily on the percentage of students that pass the TAKS Reading/ELA, Mathematics, Writing, Science and Social Studies tests. For 7th and 8th grade, the ratings are also based on annual dropout rates. For high schools, the ratings are also based on the percentage of students that have completed or return to high school after four years.

Specific student groups (All Students, African American students, Hispanic students, White students and Economically Disadvantaged students) must meet a minimum standard for TAKS performance and for dropout and school completion in order to be rated Academically Acceptable. Higher standards are used to determine if the campus earns a more desirable rating of Exemplary or Recognized. If one or more of the student groups does not meet the minimum standard, the campus is rated as Academically Unacceptable. The specific standards to be met are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Requirements for each State Accountability Rating Category

| | | | |

|Base Indicators |Academically Acceptable |Recognized |Exemplary |

|TAKS (2008-09)* | | | |

|• All students |Meets each standard: |Meets 75% standard for each |Meets 90% standard for each |

|and each student group meeting |• Reading/ELA ... 70% |subject |subject |

|minimum size |• Writing ..............70% |OR |OR Meets Standard with TPM |

| |• Social Studies. 70% |Meets 70% floor and Required | |

|* TAKS (Accommodated) included for |• Mathematics.... 55% |Improvement | |

|some grades and subjects. |• Science ............ 50% OR |OR Meets Standard with Texas | |

| |Meets Required Improvement |Projection Measure (TPM) | |

| |OR Meets Standard with Texas | | |

| |Projection Measure (TPM)* | | |

|Completion Rate I |Meets 75.0% standard | | |

|(Class of 2008) |or |Meets 85.0% standard |Meets 95.0% standard |

|• All students and each student |Meets Required Improvement |or |OR Meets Standard with Texas |

|group meeting minimum size. | |Meets floor of 75.0% and |Projection Measure (TPM) |

| | |Required Improvement | |

|Annual Dropout Rate | | | |

|(2007-08) |Meets 2.0% standard |Meets 2.0% standard |Meets 2.0% standard |

|• All students and each student |or |or |or |

|group meeting minimum size |Meets Required Improvement |Meets Required Improvement |Meets Required Improvement |

Source: TEA Accountability Manual 2009 pg.45

*Texas Projection Measure (TPM) is an estimate of whether a student is likely to pass a TAKS test in a future grade.

Academically Unacceptable ratings trigger sanctions that increase with successive years of poor performance. A Campus Intervention Team (CIT), approved by the Commissioner of Education and led by an external (non-district employee) leader, completes a needs assessment of each Academically Unacceptable school and helps the campus develop a School Improvement Plan (SIP) that is specific to each area of low performance of the school based on a Focused Data Analysis (FDA).

For schools with a second consecutive rating of Academically Unacceptable, the Campus Intervention Teams (CITs) must also recommend to the Commissioner whether the schools should be reconstituted in some way. The School Improvement Plan (SIP) and Campus Reconstitution Plan can involve the removal of a principal and/or staff, reorganization of staff and/or implementation of new programs.

Year 3 Academically Unacceptable campuses must open the new year as a reconstituted campus, continue to work with the Campus Intervention Team and attend a closed hearing before the TEA Commissioner, who, based on Spring TAKS performance, must decide whether to 1) allow the school to remain open, 2) assign a monitor, a conservator, or a management entity to address performance issues, or 3) close the school.

For Year 4 Academically Unacceptable campuses the Commissioner shall review progress and may order closure or pursue alternative management (non-profit entity or district in same ESC region). If Commissioner allows the campus to open, the school must continue CIT assignment and SIP implementation. Commissioner may appoint a monitor, conservator, management team, or board of managers to ensure SIP implementation and oversee campus.

For Year 5 Academically Unacceptable* campuses the Commissioner shall order closure or pursue alternative management (non-profit entity or district in same ESC region) and follow requirements related to closure or alternative management.

The TEA website () provides more information for parents about the state accountability system.

*Source: Academically Unacceptable Intervention Matrix

Federal Accountability Ratings

As required by the Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, school districts and campuses must also meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) criteria on three measures: Reading/Language Arts, Mathematics, and either Graduation Rate (for high schools and districts) or Attendance Rate (for elementary and middle/junior high schools)(see Table2).

If a campus, district, or state that is receiving Title I, Part A funds fails to meet AYP for two consecutive years, that campus, district, or state enters into a “Needs Improvement” stage and is subject to certain requirements that increase each year such as offering supplemental education services, offering school choice, and/or taking corrective actions.

Schools in Stage 1, Needs Improvement missed the standard in the same subject for two consecutive years. Among other activities, these schools must address areas in need of improvement in a two year Campus Improvement Plan (CIP), participate in required training, notify parents and offer students the choice to attend a different school in the district. If a student chooses to attend a different school, the district must provide transportation. The district also provides technical assistance as the campus develops and implements the CIP.

Table 2. Requirements for Federal Accountability Ratings

| | |

|Base Indicators |Met AYP |

|TAKS (2008-09)* | |

|• All students |Meets each standard: |

|and each student group meeting minimum size: |• Reading/ELA ... 67% |

|• |• Mathematics.... 58% |

|* TAKS (Accommodated) included for some grades and subjects. |OR |

|TELPAS Reading, TAKS LAT, TAKS- Modified, TAKS- Modified LAT and |Meets Required Improvement of |

|TAKS Alternate |10% decrease on non-passing |

|Attendance Rate |Meets 90.0% standard |

|• All students only |or |

| |Meets at least 0.1% Improvement |

|Completion Rate |Meets 70.0% standard |

|(Grades 9-12) |or |

|• All students and each student group meeting minimum size. |Meets at least 0.1% Improvement |

|Participation Rate: ELA & Mathematics |Tested at Campus/District 95% |

|• All students and each student group meeting minimum size: | |

Source: TEA 2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Guide pg. 22

Schools in Stage 2, Needs Improvement missed the standard in the same subject for three consecutive years in a row. These campuses continue the activities required of Stage 1 campuses (e.g. Campus Improvement Plans, required training, notify parents and School Choice). In addition, Stage 2 campuses are assigned a TEA-approved, outside Technical Assistance Provider (TAP) and must offer Supplemental Education Services (tutoring) (SES) to qualified students. Also Stage 2-5 campuses must implement the state required EZSES Management System.

Schools in Stage 3, Needs Improvement missed the standard in the same subject for four consecutive years in a row. These campuses must continue the activities required of Stage 1 and Stage 2 campuses and must also develop a Corrective Action plan and disseminate any corrective action implemented.

Schools in Stage 4, Needs Improvement missed the standard in the same subject for five consecutive years in a row. These campuses must continue the activities required of Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 campuses and must also develop a Restructuring Plan approved by TEA.

Schools in Stage 5, Needs Improvement missed the standard in the same subject for six consecutive years in a row. These campuses must continue the activities required of Stage 1, Stage 2, Stage 3 and Stage 4 campuses are required to implement the Restructuring Plan approved by TEA. Schools in Stage 5 must implement one of the alternative governance arrangements stated in the Stage 4 Restructuring Plan approved by TEA.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download